Rubric for 4.2 Collaborative Lesson Plan

|| || Rubric for Collaborative Lesson Plan – A. 4.2

This must be an ORIGINAL lesson plan.
SLIS Students’ Names: Lisa BrackenSquires and Jennifer Ramirez
Content Areas Addressed: Reading Comprehension- Synthesizing/
Science-Insect Investigation
Instructional Level: Emerging- First Grade
Lesson Plan Template Wiki URL: http://lisabrackensquires.wikispaces.com/Lesson+Plan+template

CATEGORY	10	8	4	0
Template	The lesson plan follows the template. The template components are BOLD black font and the team’s information is any readable non-bold font color.	One component of the template is missing or incorrect.	Two components of the template are missing or incorrect.	More than two components of the template are missing or the lesson plan does not follow the template. The bold and regular font format requirement was not followed.
Objectives (District or State Standards)	All student learning objectives address district or state standards. Standards are cited for each.	One state standard citation is incomplete or missing for a learning objective.	Two state standards citations are incomplete or missing for two learning objectives.	Three or more state standards citations are incomplete or missing for three or more learning objectives.
Reading Comprehension Strategy and Objective	The team includes one reading comprehension strategy and at least one reading comprehension objective that align with the other learning objectives for this lesson.		The reading comprehension strategy or objective is not aligned with the other learning objectives for this lesson.	No reading comprehension strategy is included in this lesson.
Indicators (from the AASL Standards)	AASL’s learning indicators align with state content-area standards or the objectives of this lesson. They are cited (both number and text).	One AASL learning indicator is not aligned with state content-area standards or the objectives of this lesson. Or one is not completely cited (both number and text).	Two AASL learning indicators are not aligned with state content-area standards or the objectives of this lesson. Or two are not completely cited (both number and text).	AASL’s learning standards are not integrated into the lesson or are not cited completely.
Instructional Strategies	The research-based instructional strategies are effective and one or more graphic organizers (not worksheets) are provided for student use.	The research-based instructional strategies are effective. A graphic organizer for student use is provided but it is not totally effective or not aligned with the lesson or assessment.	The research-based instructional strategies are effective but a graphic organizer is not described for student use.	The research-based instructional strategies or the graphic organizer(s) or workheet(s) are ineffective or inappropriate for the learning objectives.

CATEGORY	10	8	4	0
Assessment	The team creates a rubric as an assessment instrument for the students and for the educators. (It can be one and the same.) It is designed to accurately measure the lesson objectives.	The educators’ assessment rubric does do not accurately measure the reading comprehension strategy.	One of the assessment rubrics does do not accurately measure the learning objectives.	Either one or both of the student self-assessment or the educator rubric assessment is missing.
Collaborative Teaching	The benefits of co-teaching are evident in the main lesson in all three of these: introduction, modeling, and guided practice.	The benefits of co-teaching are evident in two of these.	The benefit of co-teaching is evident in one of these.	The benefit of co-teaching is not realized in the main lesson.
Resources And Learning Strategies	The educators select engaging resources and utilize active learning strategies.	The resources are not as rich and/or the learning experiences not as hands-on.	The resources are lack-luster as are the learning experiences.	The resources and the learning experiences are dull.
Creativity (Educators’ “Voices”)	The educators seem to be writing from knowledge and have taken the standards/objectives and creatively made them "their own.”	The educators seem to be writing from knowledge, but there is some lack of enthusiasm for the lesson or ownership of the lesson content.	The educators relate some of their own knowledge, but they add little creativity to the lesson content.	The educators have not tried to transform the curriculum in a personal way. The ideas or the way they are expressed seem to belong to someone else.
Evidence of Collaboration	The team’s wiki documents show collaboration in all aspects of this assignment: lesson plan deconstruction, scenario/planning form, and lesson plan itself. This includes extensive wiki-based discussions on all 3 pages.	The team’s wiki documents show collaboration in all aspects of this assignment: lesson plan deconstruction, scenario/planning form, and lesson plan itself. This includes some wiki-based discussions on all 3 pages.	The team’s wiki documents collaboration in two aspects of this assignment: lesson plan deconstruction, scenario/planning form, and lesson plan itself. There were wiki-based discussions on 2 pages.	The team’s wiki documents collaboration in one aspect of this assignment: lesson plan deconstruction, scenario/planning form, and lesson plan itself. There were wiki-based discussions on 1 or no wiki pages.

Total from Rubric (100 points possible): __
Note: Wiki-based discussions can include a phone log and notes on the conversation, a BB, Meebo or other chat log archive, an email trail that includes main topics of conversation or other means BUT these must be documented on the discussion tab in Wikispaces. Dates and times are not sufficient evidence.
Checklist: Have you turned in all the components of your lesson?

1. Completed lesson plan template (in bold black font). All sections are completed filled out (in regular font).
2. Graphic organizer(s)
3. Rubric assessment instrument(s)

Comments (Dr. M.):